HP calcs are really not that accurate..

[rprosperi]

(12-02-2017 10:37 AM)DA74254 Wrote:  Thanks again, and to emphasize; it was not my intension to step on anyones toes.

You can learn a lot here, depending on how you ask a question, if you have thick skin....

You can pose the same question in different ways, for example:

1. "How does one do XYZ?"

or this way:

2. "There is no question that the best way to do XYZ is [insert simple/dumb explanation here], right?"

and you will get vastly different responses. The former is likely to get fewer simple answers, including the universal (and generally appropriate) "RTFM", while the latter will provide many more elaborate and insightful answers, often leading to a series of competing solutions, each successively improving on the last.

But you may take a few small bruises in the process... Of course they heal, and you've learned a lot in the process.

@Pauli - Regarding "256 digits are far more than you'd need to represent the diameter of the universe in terms of the planck length"

Awesome statement, it just captures and states the point better than any other phrase possibly could express it. And it's cool!

And as a bonus, you've no doubt caused a lot of folks to google 'planck length'. Sure, I knew it was small, but not that it is essentially the very definition of smallest possible. Like I said, Cool!